4.7 Article Proceedings Paper

Patient-initiated treatment of uncomplicated recurrent urinary tract infections in young women

期刊

ANNALS OF INTERNAL MEDICINE
卷 135, 期 1, 页码 9-16

出版社

AMER COLL PHYSICIANS
DOI: 10.7326/0003-4819-135-1-200107030-00004

关键词

-

资金

  1. NIDDK NIH HHS [DK 53369, DK 47549] Funding Source: Medline

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Recurrent urinary tract infections (UTIs) are a common outpatient problem, resulting in frequent office visits and often requiring the use of prophylactic antimicrobial agents. Patient-initiated treatment of recurrent UTIs may decrease antimicrobial use and improve patient convenience. Objective: To determine the safety and feasibility of patient-initiated treatment of recurrent UTIs. Design: Uncontrolled, prospective clinical trial. Setting: University-based primary health care clinic. Participants: Women at least 18 years of age with a history of recurrent UTIs and no recent pregnancy, hypertension, diabetes, or renal disease. Intervention: After self-diagnosing UTI on the basis of symptoms, participating women initiated therapy with ofloxacin or levofloxacin. Measurements: Accuracy of self-diagnosis determined by evidence of a definite (culture-positive) or probable (sterile pyuria and no alternative diagnosis) UTI on pretherapy urinalysis and culture. Women with a self-diagnosis of UTI that was not microbiologically confirmed were evaluated for alternative diagnoses. Post-therapy interviews and urine cultures were used to assess clinical and microbiological cure rates, adverse events, and patient satisfaction. Results: 88 of 172 women self-diagnosed a total of 172 UTIs. Laboratory evaluation showed a uropathogen in 144 cases (84%), sterile pyuria in 19 cases (11%), and no pyuria or bacteriuria in 9 cases (5%). Clinical and microbiological cures occurred in 92% and 96%, respectively, of culture-confirmed episodes. No serious adverse events occurred. Conclusion: Adherent women can accurately self-diagnose and self-treat recurrent UTIs.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据